I would think about it as an investment. You may get a return, you may not. If nobody backs that game, it will never come to market and in some cases there is no alternative that you could buy. Backing "me too" project of course is stupid... You just have to evaluate the project and team and see if they are likely to deliver.
Then do not publish it on the Internet. If you want to keep a secret, don't share that secret.
They did not publish the pictures on the internet, they stored them in their iCloud account, big difference. If you post something on Facbook or upload it to YouTube and that later comes to bite you, that really is your fault. You willingly published something about you. But here we have something else. The iCloud is semantically part of their device, that it resides on server connected to a network is a mute point. If you decide not to trust networked services, you basically have to stop to trust any modern IT system. Say you decide to only store such things locally, how can you be sure that the software / firmware is not leaking your data clandestinely? You can't.
I personally only trust the current breed of web services (storage & apps) only as far as I can throw them. The reason being that I know how some of them are implemented and the inherent risks. But that does not preclude hat the systems could be designed in a safe way.
In addition to this being a manual process. Brute forcing with automated systems is easy, but recording the endings and trying may actually take a while.
Yes is maps very closely to the inverse of the average temperature, lagging around a good decade. Who would have though? But If you take the current decade average the trend is flat. If you take the 1979 - 2014 time range you get a clear temperatures up, ice down trend; but that does not tell you much about the future. If we had good data on the last couple of decades before that...
GTK is not the Gnome Toolkit, it is the Gimp Toolkit. That it sort of was absorbed into the Gnome project is rather a sad reality. While the Gnome 2 days it seemed like an OK trade of. But as they purposefully broke Windows support in GTK 3 for Gnome 3, the writing was on the wall. Although they brought Windows and Mac OS support back in line, GTK stopped being the reliable UI library it once was.
Yes good points, but that means that you have very few data points, as this does not occur that often. Although an interesting subject, it is clear that is becomes really hard to get good data.
You are correct, the effect, without feedback mechanisms that is, is well understood. When going from 300ppm to 600ppm the average temperatures should rise around 1C. So how did the climate scientists come to the 4C figure or the current IPCC figure of 2C? Assuming that these figures are correct, the exact feedback mechanisms that lead to these figures are not understood.
So far we can conclude that it is not in the upper atmosphere, it is not in the lower atmosphere, it is not on land surfaces and not on the ocean surface. Now we have an additional data point, it is not in the lower oceans and the ice caps are low but a slow positive trend. These last two decades have seen runaway CO2 emissions but no noticeable warming. Few people claim that high CO2 levels are a good thing, but as GP stated, we are far from understanding climate.
I think the 500km / 4h figures are with stops included. So an average of 125km/h is not bad; even though it may be better. In most areas the problem is not the train, not even the track, but restrictions because of noise. (One of the primary reasons the German railway sucks.) On the other hand high speed train service in the US, especially in almost empty mid west should work quite well.
Good that you mention Karl Benz. The restrictions imposed on him, led to the first long distance driver being a woman. As the story goes, Karl Benz was only allowed to drive the car with prior police permission and only on closed off roads. He never drove the car himself, because of fear it would explode on him. So on 5 August 1888, when Karl was out, his wife Berta decided to visit her sister in Pfortsheim. As there where no other means of transportation she and her two sons took the car on the 106 km trip. This was without the permission of her husband and the police. They had to refuel on the way and bought the ethanol in a pharmacy. This story was a PR wonder that got many restrictions lifted.
Yes, genetic factors, like who your parents are... For example Bankers, Engineers...
The problem with such a study, is that when looking at genetics it is almost impossible to divorce them from the socio-economic circumstances. The obvious problem being that the socio-economic circumstances are in most cases literally hereditary... though not genetically.
To clue you in, the comic ray line was started by Prof. Svensmark in 1998. Now it has been shown that, yes comic rays have an influence on cloud generation; but no it is not a dominant effect and definitely can not explain the trend in the later 20th century. But this one of the small puzzle pieces that was shouted down as complete nonsense, just to be reviled as being something; even though not something big.
I think it is impossible to come up with a more accurate model that does not take into account AGW. Because changing the atmosphere and composition of the land masses (e.g. deforestation/urbanization) does have an effect on climate; anybody claiming the opposite is daft. The problem is/was that the fixation on CO2 lead to the neglect of other external factors, such as the sun, cosmic radiation, deforestation... If prediction did incorporate the pause (to a certain extent), the apocalyptic 4C would seem more plausible, but as it stands we are none the wiser.
Early arctic explorers reported walrus and seal colonies that stretched miles. Like the buffalo they where industrially hunted in the 19th and early 20th century. The Walrus population has rebounded since their low in the 1950s. Walrus colonies only form on islands, not ice. Now pray tell, how does ice cover in the arctic come into play? (That is a real question, after researching the subject, I can not find any clue how ice cover affects walrus populations.)
I think you hit the nail on the head. Plausible futuristic space fights will probably be quite dull. But that misses all the nice and nasty intrigue that can play out in the attempts control a system.
But two things are certain, we can assume that the climate models from the late 90s can be rejected with a high certainty (99.9% for a 18 year span*) and that currently there is no climate scientist that can reliably predict when the earth will go out of the pause. The problem is that during the AGW debate too much science and policy was dedicated to the A part of the AGW. I personally think that indiscriminately changing the composition of the atmosphere (anything about the earth actually) will have consequences and as a result we as species should tread lightly. But I am quite disappointed of climate science community, especially in the late 90s.
* Their own definition, if the trends align on an 18 year span the model "must" be accepted with a 99.9% certainty. If you had a course in statistics, you know that the opposite is also true...
I doubt you'd ask a zoologist to explain climate change, so asking a climatologist about migration and social behavior of walruses seems equally bizarre. The WWF's voicing their opinion, not fact.
Your fixation on race shows me you have a deep lying issue that needs to be resolved. For starters I never claimed that the underlying generic makeup that forms race (or sex for that matter) has anything to do with intelligence. Also stating "intelligence" as a general measure is just daft. Some people are good at math, some people are good at linguistic some people are good at spacial reasoning... you get the point. The mere fact that Dyslexia and Autism exist and are hereditary, shows you that a certain amount of your cognitive abilities are hereditary.
Also you chose to ignore 2/3 of my post that expanded on the social economic aspect of it all. What we commonly see as "intelligence" in an adult is primarily the result of his scholastic education that person had. Nevertheless his genetic makeup (not race or sex, different bits) had a significant impact on how easy it was to get there.
Application of the method shows that there is now a trendless interval of 19 years duration at the end of the HadCRUT4 surface temperature series, and of 16 - 26 years in the lower troposphere. Use of a simple AR1 trend model suggests a shorter hiatus of 14 - 20 years but is likely unreliable.
Population sizes may fluctuate for a number of reasons that have little to do with the low ice levels: note these very recent incidents of large walrus herds and associated mortality events (2009, 2011 and 2014) have not coincided with the lowest levels of summer sea ice in the area, which occurred in 2007 and 2012.
Zoologist Dr. Susan Crockford weighs in: Mass haulouts of Pacific walrus and stampede deaths are not new, not due to low ice cover - 'The attempts by WWF and others to link this event to global warming is self-serving nonsense that has nothing to do with science...this is blatant nonsense and those who support or encourage this interpretation are misinforming the public.'
Slashdot Mirror
I would think about it as an investment. You may get a return, you may not. If nobody backs that game, it will never come to market and in some cases there is no alternative that you could buy. Backing "me too" project of course is stupid... You just have to evaluate the project and team and see if they are likely to deliver.
As the saying goes: Don't feed the trolls.
Then do not publish it on the Internet.
If you want to keep a secret, don't share that secret.
They did not publish the pictures on the internet, they stored them in their iCloud account, big difference. If you post something on Facbook or upload it to YouTube and that later comes to bite you, that really is your fault. You willingly published something about you. But here we have something else. The iCloud is semantically part of their device, that it resides on server connected to a network is a mute point. If you decide not to trust networked services, you basically have to stop to trust any modern IT system. Say you decide to only store such things locally, how can you be sure that the software / firmware is not leaking your data clandestinely? You can't.
I personally only trust the current breed of web services (storage & apps) only as far as I can throw them. The reason being that I know how some of them are implemented and the inherent risks. But that does not preclude hat the systems could be designed in a safe way.
In addition to this being a manual process. Brute forcing with automated systems is easy, but recording the endings and trying may actually take a while.
Yes is maps very closely to the inverse of the average temperature, lagging around a good decade. Who would have though? But If you take the current decade average the trend is flat. If you take the 1979 - 2014 time range you get a clear temperatures up, ice down trend; but that does not tell you much about the future. If we had good data on the last couple of decades before that...
GTK is not the Gnome Toolkit, it is the Gimp Toolkit. That it sort of was absorbed into the Gnome project is rather a sad reality. While the Gnome 2 days it seemed like an OK trade of. But as they purposefully broke Windows support in GTK 3 for Gnome 3, the writing was on the wall. Although they brought Windows and Mac OS support back in line, GTK stopped being the reliable UI library it once was.
Yes good points, but that means that you have very few data points, as this does not occur that often. Although an interesting subject, it is clear that is becomes really hard to get good data.
You are correct, the effect, without feedback mechanisms that is, is well understood. When going from 300ppm to 600ppm the average temperatures should rise around 1C. So how did the climate scientists come to the 4C figure or the current IPCC figure of 2C? Assuming that these figures are correct, the exact feedback mechanisms that lead to these figures are not understood.
Take for example this Plot from the NISDC: http://nsidc.org/data/seaice_i...
As I mentioned, it is low against the 30 year average, but far from a downward trend in the last 10 years.
So far we can conclude that it is not in the upper atmosphere, it is not in the lower atmosphere, it is not on land surfaces and not on the ocean surface. Now we have an additional data point, it is not in the lower oceans and the ice caps are low but a slow positive trend. These last two decades have seen runaway CO2 emissions but no noticeable warming. Few people claim that high CO2 levels are a good thing, but as GP stated, we are far from understanding climate.
I think the 500km / 4h figures are with stops included. So an average of 125km/h is not bad; even though it may be better. In most areas the problem is not the train, not even the track, but restrictions because of noise. (One of the primary reasons the German railway sucks.) On the other hand high speed train service in the US, especially in almost empty mid west should work quite well.
Good that you mention Karl Benz. The restrictions imposed on him, led to the first long distance driver being a woman. As the story goes, Karl Benz was only allowed to drive the car with prior police permission and only on closed off roads. He never drove the car himself, because of fear it would explode on him. So on 5 August 1888, when Karl was out, his wife Berta decided to visit her sister in Pfortsheim. As there where no other means of transportation she and her two sons took the car on the 106 km trip. This was without the permission of her husband and the police. They had to refuel on the way and bought the ethanol in a pharmacy. This story was a PR wonder that got many restrictions lifted.
Yes, genetic factors, like who your parents are... For example Bankers, Engineers...
The problem with such a study, is that when looking at genetics it is almost impossible to divorce them from the socio-economic circumstances. The obvious problem being that the socio-economic circumstances are in most cases literally hereditary... though not genetically.
To clue you in, the comic ray line was started by Prof. Svensmark in 1998. Now it has been shown that, yes comic rays have an influence on cloud generation; but no it is not a dominant effect and definitely can not explain the trend in the later 20th century. But this one of the small puzzle pieces that was shouted down as complete nonsense, just to be reviled as being something; even though not something big.
I think it is impossible to come up with a more accurate model that does not take into account AGW. Because changing the atmosphere and composition of the land masses (e.g. deforestation/urbanization) does have an effect on climate; anybody claiming the opposite is daft. The problem is/was that the fixation on CO2 lead to the neglect of other external factors, such as the sun, cosmic radiation, deforestation... If prediction did incorporate the pause (to a certain extent), the apocalyptic 4C would seem more plausible, but as it stands we are none the wiser.
No mom, I am looking at those little cute birds...
Early arctic explorers reported walrus and seal colonies that stretched miles. Like the buffalo they where industrially hunted in the 19th and early 20th century. The Walrus population has rebounded since their low in the 1950s. Walrus colonies only form on islands, not ice. Now pray tell, how does ice cover in the arctic come into play? (That is a real question, after researching the subject, I can not find any clue how ice cover affects walrus populations.)
I think you hit the nail on the head. Plausible futuristic space fights will probably be quite dull. But that misses all the nice and nasty intrigue that can play out in the attempts control a system.
I did not claim it was, now did I?
But two things are certain, we can assume that the climate models from the late 90s can be rejected with a high certainty (99.9% for a 18 year span*) and that currently there is no climate scientist that can reliably predict when the earth will go out of the pause. The problem is that during the AGW debate too much science and policy was dedicated to the A part of the AGW. I personally think that indiscriminately changing the composition of the atmosphere (anything about the earth actually) will have consequences and as a result we as species should tread lightly. But I am quite disappointed of climate science community, especially in the late 90s.
* Their own definition, if the trends align on an 18 year span the model "must" be accepted with a 99.9% certainty. If you had a course in statistics, you know that the opposite is also true...
I doubt you'd ask a zoologist to explain climate change, so asking a climatologist about migration and social behavior of walruses seems equally bizarre. The WWF's voicing their opinion, not fact.
Your fixation on race shows me you have a deep lying issue that needs to be resolved. For starters I never claimed that the underlying generic makeup that forms race (or sex for that matter) has anything to do with intelligence. Also stating "intelligence" as a general measure is just daft. Some people are good at math, some people are good at linguistic some people are good at spacial reasoning... you get the point. The mere fact that Dyslexia and Autism exist and are hereditary, shows you that a certain amount of your cognitive abilities are hereditary.
Also you chose to ignore 2/3 of my post that expanded on the social economic aspect of it all. What we commonly see as "intelligence" in an adult is primarily the result of his scholastic education that person had. Nevertheless his genetic makeup (not race or sex, different bits) had a significant impact on how easy it was to get there.
Like this: HAC-Robust Measurement of the Duration of a Trendless Subsample in a Global Climate Time Series
Application of the method shows that there is now a trendless interval of 19 years duration at the end of the HadCRUT4 surface temperature series, and of 16 - 26 years in the lower troposphere. Use of a simple AR1 trend model suggests a shorter hiatus of 14 - 20 years but is likely unreliable.
Ok you want real science? Here is what the Zoologist Dr. Susan Crockford has to say on the subject: Mass haulouts of Pacific walrus and stampede deaths are not new, not due to low ice cover AGW may have severe effects on the environment (18 year pause anyone?), but THIS is not one of them.
Population sizes may fluctuate for a number of reasons that have little to do with the low ice levels: note these very recent incidents of large walrus herds and associated mortality events (2009, 2011 and 2014) have not coincided with the lowest levels of summer sea ice in the area, which occurred in 2007 and 2012.
Zoologist Dr. Susan Crockford weighs in: Mass haulouts of Pacific walrus and stampede deaths are not new, not due to low ice cover - 'The attempts by WWF and others to link this event to global warming is self-serving nonsense that has nothing to do with science...this is blatant nonsense and those who support or encourage this interpretation are misinforming the public.'